Zevachim 73

The following recording of Daf Ayin Gimmel was taken from the previous shear on Daf Ayin Beis and is being presented here again as a standalone recording. As we make our way onto Daf Ayin Gimmel on Amud Aleph, that really depends to the Gemara's Bakkli Beruba. The reason there's no Bittel B'Rov in our Mishna is because we're dealing with a Sha'ar. And a Sha'ar is a Davar Sheb'Minian. And it's true, it's not a Davar that everybody counts. It's a Davar that some people count, but it's not Ish Darko L'Monosheinu, but rather it's Kol Sha'ar Darko L'Monosheinu. The question is, who's this Tanna in Shas that holds Kol Sha'ar Darko L'Monos? You want to tell me it's Reb Meir from the Mishna Maseches Zera'im? Ani Reb Shimon Ela Reb Yochanan who said Ish Darko L'Monos? Who's the Tanna? So the Gemara said Reb Papa said Hai Tanna Tanna D'Litzei Tzei'us. The Tanna D'Litzei Tzei'us. The Od Ma'achol Davar Sheyeish B'Minian, anything that people sometimes count, Afilu B'Rabbanan, even for Issurei D'Rabbanan, the Halacha is Lo Batal. It's not Batal. But Kol Sheyeish B'Minian D'Oraisa, certainly when you're dealing with Issurei D'Oraisa such as in our Sugya, Tanei Ve'Lo D'Oraisa, Litra Kitzitz She'Darso Al Pi Igul. So the context over here is that once upon a time figs was a very important staple. It was something that everybody would eat. You'd eat fig cakes, fig this, fig that. So figs figs was was a very very important part of of people's diet. And the way they used to make figs is you'd cut figs, you'd leave them out in the field to dry. Afterwards, they would cut off the stem and they would then bunch all the figs together and they had certain molds. So think of a round mold like you're making a cake, a round mold. They would put it on top of this bundle of figs and it would take on a shape, you know, depending on the the shape of the mold. That would be the shape of this cake and then they would sell it in the shop. People they would have these big cakes of figs. You'd cut off a little bit, you'd buy the whole thing, you know, whatever it is. And you'd end up buying this figs. What happened over here was there was a litra of kitzitz. Litra a like a litter of figs of dried and cut figs. So, he took a mold and somebody took this round mold and he that had figs in it and he took the mold and he put it on top of figs and here's the punchline, that was truma. The eagle dar so, but this person is running a commercial factory. He has a whole bunch of these eagles and he just doesn't know which one of them was the one that he put the truma on. So, he knows that the top Remember it's the top of one of these molds has a little bit of truma in it. He just doesn't know which one. He has a hundred of them. He has two hundred of them. Whatever it is, he has a massive factory and he knows that one of them has in it a a little bit of truma. So, what are you supposed to do with it? Or dar so, because of this or instead of using an eagle he used the used a a barrel, same difference. He used the barrel to give the fig cake this form. Then you use a dar so, al pi ki varis. Use the beehive. People would sometimes use beehives to make these fig cakes. Then you use a varis dar so, so mayor. You know, mayor said that it was a mayor and mayor said so you often in shas you find a on mayor and how to understand the time. It's not often in shas you find a cannot in how to understand the time. So, we have here in this mishna a mayor and mayor mayor and mayor had to understand the mayor and mayor and mayor. So, is that truma is bottle of mayor. It's not bottle of mayor. It's not bottle of It's bottle of mayor. So, if you have a hundred times kind of get the truma, the is it would be bottle. Now, what's interesting over here is that we know for sure that the truma is on the edge of the eagle. It's on the edge of the It's on the edge of of this So, the can you use everything that's in the eagle to go now and be in the bottle what's on the edge or maybe not because being that I know it's on the edge anyway, it's not viewed as being with what's inside the eagle. Let's say the eagle is this deep. It goes, it's a foot deep. So, oh, and I know for sure the trumah is on the edge. So, why should I say that the trumah on the edge is not a reef with what's above it? It doesn't make any sense. So, the trumah, you can argue that there's no reason to allow me to use all that trumah to give me the sheer of mayor of trumah to now go be mevatel the trumah. Staying in this is not the way it works. He says, "Royness you look at the top part. That's where the peah eagle is. That's where the trumah is." Kilo ain't produce. You look at it as if it's separated. The bottom of the is and everything beneath it my is it counts for the sheer mayor to be mevatel the trumah. So, Rabbi Shimon says, "Absolutely not. No way. I know for sure it's on the peah of the eagle. I can't use everything that's in the eagle to be mevatel. What's then the halacha? If mayor of trumah if this yid this saichal had a hundred of these moles and we know or a hundred and one of these moles, one of them had trumah, a hundred of them didn't have trumah, so then you could say the hundred piece peah of the eagles could be mevatel the one that has trumah. But to use everything inside the eagle to be mevatel, I know for sure that the trumah is not there. So, we don't look at it as being part of the taruvus." So, Rabbi Shimon says, "If mayor of trumah if there's a hundred and one of these things meaning a hundred canegid the one, then yahu. Then if not, assurim the trumah are going to be assur. The flip side is that all the shalayim is going to be mutar as well. Meaning what's on the bottom of the path, what's on the bottom of the kivares, the bottom of the eagle shouldn't be assur cuz we know for sure there's no trumah there. That's the way Rabbi Meir explained the machlokes Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehudah. Meaning according to Rabbi Meir, there's a shitas Rabbi Eliezer that says a very big chidush that says royness kilo ain't produce that you can chashbin everything in the eagle when you mashier a hundred times heter canegid the issur. Rabbi Shimon says, "No, there's no reason you should be able to mevatel everything that's in the eagle." So, Rabbi Meir says, "If mayor of trumah yahu, then assur the shalayim." Rabbi Yehudah says, he had a different view. He had Rabbi Eliezer >> In Rabbi Yehuda's version of the Rabbi Yehuda was Rabbi Yeshua in Ramez version. Meaning there's no such sheet as Rabbi Yehuda says Rabbi Yehuda that you can be prudent. Does it make any sense? Why should you be able to do that? But rather what it means is is Rabbi Yehuda held sheet as Rabbi Yeshua that at least if you have a hundred the hundred can be Yeshua and there was Rabbi Yeshua's sheet Rabbi Yehuda is that a few soldiers even if you have 300 loyal is it's still not going to work. What's the beer? What's the beer before we finish the bracha? The beer is because Rabbi Yehuda understood in Rabbi Yeshua that you can never be truma that's on the pit of a an eagle. That if you have these figs at the mouth of one of these eagle the value cannot you cannot be the reason you can't be is because it's a it's now time is the even if it's a minion it's not something that everybody counts. It's something that people sometimes count. So you want to have a tunnel that holds that there's no by kosher something that people sometimes count. I just found it. You know what it is? It's Rabbi Yehuda a little bit of Yeshua. Rabbi Yehuda Yeshua who learned in the of that there's no at all. Not only can you be about even if you have a hundred can that you still wouldn't be able to the reason is because what's on the pit of this eagle is not something you can be about. Why can't you be about? There's everything. If milk falls into your meat there's always why in the world shouldn't it be the carrots is because it's not this is a why is it a because some people count it but only some people count it. Here's the time. So you wanted the time that holds that that will be the time of our mission. our mission that said that our mission that said that the why aren't they bottle the reason that bottle is because they're shivaru a shiver is something that people sometimes count who's the time that holds that people some that something that people sometimes count is kosher that it shouldn't be bottle so the first attempt that was the fine base the first attempt was that it's by till some of the mission is on the the second attempt that's the fine it's rib yahudah a little bit of in the mission of of literature price continues and the price that says what would be if there's a eagle if a person was truma that had in it with the eagle of any day there is a market eagle but he doesn't know what part of this eagle might have been very big right so he doesn't know where exactly the eagle was he doesn't know if it was the drama so I feel a little cut from the so that everybody agrees in that case that if that the whole the whole eagle would be to be because here you don't know where it is if you know it's on the pit that's when you have this what's on the bottom of it can't be to be but if you don't know where it is then the whole eagle all the contents of the eagle is considered the all the contents of the eagle is considered the so it's portion over there that everything would be to be going back to the original question why is the why is the why is it not bottle said so you don't have to say that it's going according to the that holds culture whether it's in the mission of till some whether it's rib yahudah a little bit of in the mission of literature it's everybody I feel like everybody could hold that way why because I feel like I feel like I because the about the way back and about is kosher about is not bottle yeah when you're dealing with eggs you're dealing with when you're dealing with literature there you have clarify. This is it's not Bal Bal is what's the question? So Bal is how could you tell me a person even a Bal how could you tell me it's Bal Bal is Bal but the is not finished. Wait the is not so we said the first Sugya here in Parshas is we have a share in this school one of the is or the was necessary in the Bal is there's no Bal. I feel the the says there's no Bal. Why not? Either because Bal because Bal is Bal I have an I have a way to be able to be this be able to bring from this Bal without having to come on to the Bal. What's the the why can I just out one animal from this Bal the name and let me say call the Bal and let me assume that this obviously came from the and really in order to properly understand the is need a little bit of an intro. Not a long intro but the point is is that we know that the word comes up in many places in but not all were created equally. The theory of is all the same and all are learned from the same Parshas after but there's a lot of different manifestations of the of the concept of the one that we've been discussing this morning is where you have a Bal voice. I have a a pot or I have a bunch of animals. I know most of them are kosher one of them is problematic. I don't know which one is which. So there's a Bal we say that the meat is Bal to the and I now look at the whole Bal everything inside the Bal as if it's what the Bal is. It's a phenomenal but if something non-kosher falls into a pot where you have kosher food the non-kosher becomes kosher. According to many of you can eat it all but you can still eat it all but according to some of you can't even eat it because it's the to be like that but the point is is the concept of bit of right. Then there's an idea where I have something in front of me and I don't know where it came from. And I know roiv is a certain way. Like for example, the classic case of the Gemara is there were 10 stores in the city, nine of the stores sold kosher meat, one of the stores sold non-kosher meat. I have a piece of meat in front of me. I don't know if it came from the kosher store or the non-kosher store. Being that roiv of the stores are are kosher, so I could assume that it probably came from there. It's not a question of bitto. There's no bitto over here. There's no taruvos. It's just a piece of meat that has a subject. I don't know where it came from. So there's a law of a bit of right. And then there's a concept of roiv that's mevarer sfeikos. There's a roiv of um the no. Roiv achra baal. Roiv people are not straight for us. Like there's a whole bunch of different roivs that you find in shas. Till the iko sugiyo over here is the roiv of bit of right. And that the Mishnah said there's no bit of right. If a shor niskaal is in a taruvos in a taruvos of other shvarim that are heter, a shor can't be bottle. Can't be bottle. Can't become tofel to a taruvos. Why not? Either cuz it's shavya d'minyan or because it's a baal chai. But in the Gemara, let's forget about bitto. You're right. Bitto is a very big chiddush. Bitto what happens is things are changing. There's nebach over here. Forget about bitto. Forget about nebach. Het is heter is heter. Let's keep it simple. Why don't we just yank out one shor from this taruvos? Say kol d'parish meruba parish. I don't need the shor to become bottle. I took it out of the taruvos. But let me say that just like if there's 10 stores in the city, nine of them sold kosher meat, one sold non-kosher meat. The piece of meat is assumed to have come from the no use cuz kol d'parish meruba parish. So let me pull out one shor and say kol d'parish meruba parish. And why can't I have that right? And for that there's no law of shavya d'minyan. For that there's no law of baal chai. Those are shvarim in bit of right. I don't need bit of right. I could work with the other right. With the roiv of kol d'parish meruba parish. Says the Gemara, get the nim shoyach. Let's pull out one shor. The nikuv chadminayu. Let's be makriv it. The neima and we'll assume kol d'parish meruba parish. So if the Gemara that doesn't work that's all it's true that says called the polish but the also says called connect the basic understanding of take the same case there were 10 stores in the city 9 of them sold kosher meat and one of them sold non-kosher meat. So what's the the is that if you find a piece of meat you could assume it came from the line not from the one we can assume it's kosher meat. What would be if I bought the meat from one of the stores. I physically walked in I swiped my credit card. I bought the piece of meat. I just don't remember which store I bought it from. Did I buy from the kosher one or from the non-kosher one? If I myself take the double that was polished from the I'll call now how works and how you reconcile with so many chance anytime you see the word you know you're going to have which means short but you know you're going to see long it it always comes along because cover is a is a but that's the base. That's the only time the of called the polish is is if it was polish. When I found it when I picked it up it was already not part of the but if I picked it out of the then the way we look at it is is we look at the mirror as if it's if it made a path of the and we don't say that it was polish it was polish you don't have the called the polish so the saying what do you want? You want to go ahead and pull one out I mean this is called the 101 this is called the polish 101. How do we the connect so the saying you're right that's not what I meant what I meant was I mean What we should do is we should force the animals to go away. We're not going to pull out one animal. The animals are all cooped up somewhere we're going to knock it down if it's like a type of we're going to knock down the the fence let the animals go and roll of it and then we'll take one out but when I take it it won't be coming out of the time anymore. So it's it's not a called connect and let's force them to move. You know what I'm worried about? We're worried about what's going to happen. You're going to take an animal and you're going to be Let's say there were 10 animals. Nine of them were good. And one of them was a We just don't know what's what. Right. So, what are you going to do? You're going to go and you're going to make it a parish. You're going to take one and you're going to bring it as a carbon. What's going to happen if another coin is going to go afterwards? He's going to bring another one. And then another coin is going to go afterwards, he's going to bring another one. And you're going to end up bringing 10. You're going to end up bringing so many that now already you will not bring the right versus the milk. Now it's going to be that what the one that I was not with wasn't anymore from the right because to the contrary I we already not with the right. You don't have a right to be to be not with. So, we're concerned that maybe after you are not with this one parish, other coins are going to go and they're going to do the same thing. But the says I'm going to you should be worried that So, that's it. I can't bring the carbon now. I have to worry that maybe the down will be possible. Maybe it will be possible. It's the way of saying that do you actually say right? What does it mean to say? What do you want to say that there's no such thing as Once we bring one under the promise of called the parish nothing can happen afterwards that can mess me up. So, the says I hear. I hear. But the says there's still a mission you you can have a Maybe they'll do it at the same time. Oh, 10 people will do it at the same time. So, then you're not going to have the called the parish. But the says that you can have a mission you have Is it actually with something that 10 at the same exact second? Presumably it won't happen at the same second. Each one is going to happen individually. If each one happens individually, for each you do have the called the parish. Oh, robber, so said mission you're right. What I'm saying is is that I'm worried that if you're going to go ahead and be macro of it in this context, you may be macro of it even without first spreading them apart. If I take one out after I spread it, that's called the partial partial. But if I leave them together and then I take one out, that's called Cabo Cabo Cabo. The cash is why in the mission you Cabo. Why don't we just take spread them out and then take one out? What's the answer? It should work. But it's because it only works if you do it perfectly. You have to first spread them out and then slap it out. But if I don't first spread them out and slap it out, then I was macro of something I'm not allowed to be macro of on the So we're not going to take chances. We're not going to take any risks. That's why the is you want to know if there's an answer yet. The answer is not it's called the partial partial. But it's only going to work if you follow the guidelines, the very very strict guidelines. If you don't follow the strict guidelines, you can mess it up. Stakes are very high. You do it right, it's called the partial partial. You do it wrong, it's called Cabo Cabo Cabo. Do you say to the mission is partial Cabo. You Cabo is we don't want to take chances. There's no cuz it's a of a minion or because I'm not a bottle. The reason you can't take all the partial partial is because you would have to work it out perfectly and the were not willing to take that risk. In theory, could you do it? Yes. But at the same time, the were willing to take that risk. That's why the mission said you Cabo excel. So before we go further or before we end, just a little bit of red. That is that the mission is discussing a of a show Cabo that was in Cabo. The mission says the is Cabo. The question is why? Cabo Cabo. We touched on some of the the Cabo in as it relates to the of of right. Ask the Cabo Cabo as well. The what's the of the Gamara that there should be a bit of a on a show hand this go. That the show hand this go should be bottle to all this walking that are hectic. A show hand this go you can't be matched. If I can't be matched a show hand this go, then how in the world could you say bit of a right and that the milk is never to the right in this voice. How could you take something that's not hectic and make it hectic? Bit of a right has powers, but bit of a right should take a show hand this go that doesn't have a show and give it all you did the din bit of kind of that's not something that should be able to be done. Now you could always say the mission is discussing where it was hectic beforehand. I am we discuss that but the past this is not that way. The past this is we're discussing a show hand this go that's not hectic. It's not hectic it was with animals that are hectic. Ordinarily the mission starts off by saying you would think there should be a lot of bit of a right. Well bit of a right mean that every single animal in this voice is now a kosher animal. How could you have every animal be a kosher animal? In order for an animal to be you have to be this one animal in this voice that never had so it never had and when it's a show hand this go you can't be matched it. So how in the world is there even a have a mino that there should be a din now in order to fully appreciate this in order to fully appreciate this you have to take three steps backwards and we have to speak out some right and that will come back to the and the the right begins with a well known chuva from the the and 7000 discuss the following shadow. We know that have to be made with the shadow was where somebody was a he made what he did for a living and he had that had not been covered with and he had a lot of other that were covered with and the that were uncovered with got mixed up with the that were covered with and the shadow was can I sell the tzitzis can I not sell the tzitzis? Look here, I have tzitzis here that are possul. Because if it's not b'shma, the tzitzis are going to be possul. But it was nisarev in a taruvos, with rov of the taruvos, what b'shma? So maybe just like there's a halacha of bitul b'rov, there's a halacha of taruvos of acharei rov. Mah tiskol Let the tzitzis that were not b'shma be battul to the tzitzis that were b'shma. Says the Inyanei D'Igra D'Bei M'sisa, he can clarify a very similar shaila. We know that matzah has to be made b'shma as well. Matzah has to be made b'shma. What would be if somebody had matzah that was not made b'shma and it was nisarev in a taruvos with matzos that were prepared b'shma? Could I eat the matzos below Pesach and be m'kayem my mitzvah d'oraisa d'achilu matzos? Could I sell it for $100 a pound? Or or could I not? What's the shaila? Mitzad echad, I know these matzos over here that weren't made b'shma. But then again, it was nisarev in a taruvos with rov of the matzos that were made b'shma. I think that that the halacha always is that you go b'sar rov. So l'chumra, go b'sar rov over here and maybe say that the meat of matzos that weren't made b'shma should be battul to the matzos that were made b'shma. Says the Inyanei D'Igra a tremendous chiddush. This is a chiddush that was marish alamos. This is a chiddush that's quoted by the poskim over and over and over again. It's one of the most basic fundamental principles that you have to have when you go through sugiyos of taruvos and we're learning perek taruvos right now. Says the Inyanei D'Igra that that's true that bitul has a koach to take something that's assur, something that's possul, and say that if it was nisarev in a taruvos, with rov of the taruvos, doesn't have that psul, rov of the taruvos doesn't have that issur, we're going to now view this dover hamuot as if it takes on the din of the rov, which is it's not going to have the psul, it's not going to have this chisar. Stating that if I have something that was nisarev in a taruvos and I want it to take on the din of the rov of the taruvos. But in order for it to really get that din, it would further a mice? You would have needed a mice in order for this status to be held on this thing? Bitul the right king to life mice. So where I need the bitul to remove a hisaron and said I need to get the bitul to remove a hisaron. But when I need bitul to stout sue something, to stout sue mice, that's something I cannot do. So says the Inyanei the shmuel is a halacha that the person that's preparing the tzitzis has to have in mind in order for the tzitzis to be considered lishma. I need to do something in order for it to be lishma. Bitul can't be as if I did it. And as a result, you can't say that the dover that's not lishma, that was nisarer with the thing that was lishma, somehow is going to get the din lishma. It can't do that. If there's a hisaron, you have trumah. You're not allowed to eat trumah. So if I have trumah, which I'm not allowed to eat, there's a psul, there's an issur attached to trumah. Trumah's kodish. But for a zar, for the man on the street, it's a problem. The fact that it's kodish, that results in issur. So bitul's going to say that if the ray doesn't have the issur, okay, so now the dover bottle, the dover mut won't have this issur either. I have a hisaron. I'm going to remove the hisaron. That's something that bitul could do. But if I'm missing something, if I'm lacking something, bitul can't stout sue something that I'm lacking. So if it's a felt lishma these tzitzis, bitul doesn't have an ability to give it lishma. If it's a felt lishma the matzah, bitul doesn't have an ability to give it lishma. How's this matzah becoming lishma? How are these tzitzis becoming lishma? The Inyanei assumed that for another person. One of the things that the Inyanei says when he goes through this trumah is he explains psat in Rabbeinu Tam that answers the kasha that we spoke about on Friday. We mentioned on Friday that Tosafos asks a gevaldige kasha right here in the end of Zevachim 111. But this is really a Tosafos in many places in shas. Tosafos says that the Gemara says in Maseches Sanhedrin that if there were people that were on death row, they were in the skilah and they were in the srefah, and they got mixed up. We don't know who's in the skilah, we don't know who's in the srefah. So the halacha is they always get the Misas Kallah. So, the Gemara says, quoting Rebbe Shimon that holds that Sreifa is Chamurah, so what's the Halacha? You give them Skilah, you don't give them Sreifa. The case is Madayak that it sounds like that Halacha is going to be true even if Rov of the people were Nisrafin. See, you had a Me'us of Nisaklin and a Rov of Nisrafin, and the Me'us of Nisaklin would Nisakil with the Rov of Nisrafin. So, the Halacha is, you're still going to give them Skilah. Why? Because you always give them Misas Kallah. Rebbe Tosfos, V'Yishal Rebbe Yitzchak Rebbeinu Tam, Rebbe Shimon says, they always give you Skilah. Why not? Why don't you say Rov? And Tosfos, don't tell me you don't go by the Rov when it comes to Dinei Nefashos. That was Friday's rate because we we know from the Gemara in Chulin Daf Yud Aleph Amud Beis that you do go by the Rov. And Rebbeinu Tam answered Rebbe Yitzchak. So, imagine one of them, like Tosfos, he's sitting in front of Rebbeinu Tam a fake the Magash Magashila. Why aren't the Nisaklin Bottel to the Nisrafin and say that everybody should get Sreifa? Rebbeinu Tam said that you don't go by the Rov to determine what Misah a person is supposed to get. Very, very Sus. Being that anyways they're getting either Skilah or Sreifa, it's just a Shaila, Skilah or Sreifa. But we anyways know you're getting Misah. To determine what Misah you're supposed to get, when it comes to that, you don't go by the Rov. It's Yichudua. The Saisah Choshen asked the Gavaldiga Kashah. We know the Halacha is that a Bas Kohen that's Mizana, Yitzchak Rebbeinu Tam, Rebbe Shimon says, the Eis Tisaref, she gets Sreifa. So, ordinarily an Eis Ish gets either Chenek or if she's an Eis Morasa, she gets Skilah. But a Bas Kohen that's Mizana, Eis Tisaref, the Eis Tisaref, she has to get Sreifa. Tosfos, every Bas Kohen. How do you know she's a Bas Kohen? Her father's a Kohen. It's all based on Rov B'Rov Achrayus I thought when it comes to determining which Misah you're supposed to get, you don't go by the Rov. If Rebbeinu Tam is Gurayach that the Nisaklin are not Bottel to the Nisrafin, why not? Because we don't use Rov. Rov Nisrafin to determine the Eis Misah. Being that anyways there's a Chiyuv Misah, it's just a Shaila V'Elu Misah. For that, there's no Rov. So, Freg the Saisah Choshen, every Bas Kohen gets Sreifa. She's one of Shochein to get Misah. she's going to get panic. She's going to get scared like an ordinary Asian sage. No, because she's a best coin. So now we say no, instead you're going to get straight for. She don't like the fact that the whole best coins mix you say the best coin is because of her which is right below it goes out to her right. So isn't this the biggest right in the world that you do go by right to the tournament how could say you don't go by right TO THE TOURNAMENT BEST COIN HERE IS a choice of the coins the coins because what are the best how many? You don't go by right works for everything. You can be called over the entire with right but to determine me SO THAT THAT THAT'S where the buck stops. What's in so you know what I'm saying he's saying he's saying that right could only take away but right can't create a for a person to be high of straight for you need a best of the past king plainly is high of straight for being that you need a best of the king people can't create a of the king people can't say that this if it's bottle we remove the if it's bottle we remove the but people can't say that if right of the people in this have a then they have this that they're high of straight for so now the double moves also going to have that he's also going to have that he's also going to be high of straight for that's not something people has an ability to do and just like people can't make something that were not told and people can't make that weren't prepared people can't take someone that doesn't have a and the case I'M MAKING THIS DOESN'T MAKE ANY TIME NEVER MEANT TO SAY THAT you can't use right to determine why shouldn't be able to use right to determine and it's a passing in the the best it's all based on a right but at the time I have to say something else he meant to hear we're dealing with a bit of a right bit of a right which works with of a net back with a mood gets the din of the right in which it was that doesn't work to create a that's why you're not going to have this over here. It's interesting that it's safe in a true war in the nation of dollar discuss this child as well. So the child sent the next of the same exact child that was sent to the other Yontif and that is he wanted to know if somebody has sits as that weren't totally or masses that weren't and it was necessary with things that were prepared you could or you can't. So the first thing that the discusses do you even say bitter when it comes to mix this interesting given you could you use but you find bitter political regarding history you have the history true man you have a possible and the favor you always find it in the context of this can I rely on a bit of to create a mix for so that I should be able to go ahead and do a mix for and he said it's possible to me that it said that you would be able to then he says the one that Yontif but then he says one other thing the show you the show you had an interesting he said that by him there was a safer tire and the safer tire had a I had a mistake there was a mistake in the safer tire and they were trying to find the mistake in the safer tire they couldn't find the mistake in the safer tire so he wanted to know that with his that you could say bitter even for mix voice maybe you could say that even though this safer tire has in it but being that we can't find it let the in the safer tire be bottle to all the in the safer tire that are kosher and let's say bitter which should be a kosher safer tire needless to say that it was not happy with the show you that it said said what no way why not this one is very possible what's this one very good cuz over here the safer tire is possible there's no show you the safer tire is possible the whole show you is sits that are kosher and sits that are possible so you can tell me that the sits that are possible maybe can be bottle to the sits that are kosher the masses that are possible maybe can be bottle to the masses that ARE KOSHER MAYBE GOOD we have a show you from the other Yontif we have super duper to maybe be whatever maybe you can go down that line but you need to establish that this kosher and this possible and the possible going to be bottled to the kosher. WHAT'S BEING BOTTLED TO WHAT OVER HERE? THEY SAY THE TORAH IS POSSIBLE. Once you have the noise in the safer Torah that's kosher, the safer Torah safer Torah is right now is right now possible safer Torah. You going to tell me the words that are kosher words are bottled to the words that the word that's possible is bottled to the words that are kosher. Words is not a a heft of if they ask me that you could say this word is bottled to that word. Then the could is is that to say that Torah is possible. I mean that the safer Torah is not a possible. Probably not going to have it. I just will end with this and that is mayan mayan. You know, it's interesting there's a true from the safer where the safer was asked something else. There was a where they had a possible safer Torah in the Aron Kodesh. They had eight sifrei Torah in the Aron Kodesh. One of the sifrei Torah was possible and they can't remember which safer Torah was possible. And they mission backwards and forwards and they can't find it. They can't find the guys. They don't know what to do. So here ready the show wanted to know. He said can I rely on can I say you're right eight seven of them are kosher one is possible. Let's say bitel barov. I'll pull one out called the parsha maybe. You know, okay that's you may have the eight Aron Kodesh is I'm not sure how you're going to work this out. But but the point is that was the shaila. The shaila was is could you say bitel barov. So the safer said that this is already something that actually rather be already discussed. He brings that there's a true from the Adam Leo where the Adam Leo was asked the same shaila and the Adam Leo wanted to be make all. Listen to what he said. Listen to what he said. The Adam Leo said because even though at first glance what are you going to tell me? Safer Torah is there a more double kosher than the world that is safer Torah? So maybe that the safer Torah is a double kosher. K'ticha l's'chabed. Eggs. K'ticha l's'chabed. Asher niska. A safer Torah? What's the shaila? So of course the safer Torah is not bottled. It's a double minyan. It's a double minyan. Yeah. A Torah minyan. So what's the question? Of course of course the safer Torah is not going to go. What's the meter that a safer Torah should be bottled? But the Adam Leo said a a k'ticha. He wanted to tell to that halacha is that if you have a k'ticha basar a k'ticha l's'chabed literally. Right? Chaticha piece of meat. And this piece of meat is nisa b'nisa, so it's a davar chashuv, it's not batel. Stating that there's a halacha, let's say the chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, what is this? It's a kosher piece of meat, and inside of it is a bli'a of non-kosher food. Then the halacha is you don't have the din of chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. The only time you have the din of chaticha re'uya l'shabbos is if the davar ha'asur is chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. But if the davar ha'asur is a bli'a that's inside a chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, we don't look at the davar ha'asur as being the chaticha, we look at the davar ha'asur as being a bli'a, and a bli'a is not a chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. The bli'a itself is not a davar chashuv, so you don't have the halacha of chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. So in the Sefer Yad Eliyahu, the Pischei T'shuva brings this by the way in Resha'im Tes and Luchos Zeves Tzedek, and this t'shuva is Yad Eliyahu. So he wanted a taina that a Sefer Torah that has a to'is could be used the same thing. Because the Sefer Torah is not the issue, it's the mistake in the Sefer Torah that's the issue. The mistake is not chashuv, to the contrary, it's a mistake. It just passuls the Sefer Torah. So he said that the to'is in the Sefer Torah is like the bli'a in the chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. And just like in the Sugya chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, if the chaseron is the bli'a in the chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, you don't have the din that it's not batel, because the chaseron is not in the chaticha, the chaseron is in the in the a bli'a. Here too, the chaseron is not in the Sefer Torah, this this chaseron is is in the to'is. Either way, the Chasam Sofer brings this t'shuva, and he says like this, "B'lav hachi, divrei Yad Eliyahu t'muhin d'einam l'fi fi hada." He thinks that this taina was einam l'fi hada of the Yad Eliyahu. He says, "What He says that the to'is God is the reason why chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, if there's a bli'a there's no problem, is because in that case we're obviously discussing with a bli'a didn't make the whole chaticha passul. If the whole chaticha became passul, then the whole chaticha is va'ideh assur. Ela mai, you have a bli'a of issur that's living inside a chaticha re'uya l'shabbos. In that case we say that even though it's in the chaticha re'uya l'shabbos, but being that the psul is only the bli'a, the psul is not the heter itself. There's no problem. But over here, once there's a mistake in the safer Torah, it's the same safer that it's the whole safer Torah is ossur. And being that the whole safer Torah is ossur, what's the difference if the safer Torah is ossur because the whole safer Torah is ossur? Or the safer Torah is ossur because there's one letter, one ois in the safer Torah that's pusul. At the end of the day, I don't have a kosher safer Torah. So the the dover have pusul is the safer Torah. And the safer Torah, of course, is a dover chashuv, it's a chiddush of the shabbos. Based on that, the Chasam Sofer said it'd be a big problem. Mamash, he ended up coming up with a chulah and eitzah with a sfek sfeikah maybe to be able to work out besides that fact if you find yourself in such a situation so you should be able to learn and increase the Torah based on a random shittah. That's already the income of the But the bottom line is it's coming back to the kasha. Started off with a what seemed to be like an eidel kasha. The kasha wasn't for sure on this kasha that's not hekdish. Wasn't sure if it was in a taruvos of zocher. Say bitter of the rove that the shurah on this kasha be botel. Is it so possible that it could be bitter straight from the chaim oizer? It should be totally in all this rate because bitter of the rove could only take away a chaseron. Bitter of the rove can't stel tzu something. And in order for a shurah on this kasha to be hekdish, you'd have to stel tzu hekdish. We would need it to be chal hekdish. Just like you can't create lishmah in tzitzis al yidei bitter, you can't create lishmah in matzos al yidei bitter. There's no bitter maybe when it comes to safer Torah and askaris of lishmah etc. etc. Lechurah, based on that, there should not be a din bitter on the sh- to give hekdish to the shurah on this kasha. So lechurah, stellt zich the shailah. And with this, what's the haveah minah that should be bitter with the shurah on this kasha? How in the world is there going to be bitter to create a chalos?